Followup to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0003091601390.1186-100000@asdf.capslock.lan>
By author: "Mike A. Harris" <mharris@meteng.on.ca>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> It is specific. I read it as a 386 system. i486 is a 486
> system.
>
> And how would saying ix86 making it more specific?
>
> Actually, "x86" or "ia32" are the appropriate terms. If you are
> refering to the Intel 32 bit linux port (or original depending on
> your viewpoint and level of pragmatism), it is _mislabeled_
> "i386" for legacy reasons. Calling your machine an
> "i386" because of the name linux gives it architecturally is a
> good way to be misunderstood. Use "x86" or "ia32" to refer to
> Intel architecture as opposed to sparc/alpha, etc..
>
No, it really isn't. The i386 is a *very* different architecture than
the 8086, i186, or i286. The name IA-32 is a very recent construct.
-hpa
-- <hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Mar 15 2000 - 21:00:17 EST